-
edhelas
yes, this allows me to properly setup the popup window and negociate the jingle call after that
-
nyco
is our wiki down? or it is just me...
-
nyco
it's back...
-
nyco
there has been a very high delay on xmpp.org and jabber.org... for me
-
jonas’
yeah, it’s been flapping here, too
-
Zash
Oh I thought my s2s was broken just now
-
Ge0rG
I just had IPv6 issues, it seems
-
nyco
ok... hey do we have some monitoring on our infra?
-
MattJ
We don't
-
nyco
I guess we should... should we put such an item somewhere close to the top of the task list of the iTeam? I mean no harrassment
-
MattJ
It's somewhere below "First draw up a list of what servers and services we are running"
-
nyco
ok, thx :) May The Force Be With You
-
MattJ
Speaking of iteam, I'm updating Github permissions as we discussed in one of the recent board meetings
-
MattJ
Anyone who doesn't have access to something they think they ought to have access to, feel free to poke me and I'll investigate
-
Zash
Who should have access to what?
-
MattJ
The main change is that there is a (hidden, iirc) "Web" team
-
MattJ
which has a bunch of people in it
-
MattJ
All the people who are actually doing stuff are already in teams that already have access to the relevant repos
-
MattJ
So the goal is to simplify Github permissions so they align with XSF team membership
-
MattJ
which will make it easier to see and manage who has access to what
-
MattJ
to clarify what I wrote above - the "Web" team exists, but is being removed in favour of more well-defined teams
-
pep.
:)
-
MattJ
Link Mauve is popping up a lot
-
MattJ
Are you actually in any formal teams?
-
pep.
I don't think he is
-
MattJ
There is a team called "xep build" with literally just Link Mauve in it
-
pep.
:D
-
pep.
He just helps a lot
-
pep.
But I don't think he's got any commit rights
-
pep.
(or should have by the definition above)
-
MattJ
"xep build" has read access to xep-docker-base (but read access is already default for all org members), and write access to xsf/xeps
-
pep.
oh
-
pep.
Maybe he should "just" become an editor
-
MattJ
Well, as per the discussion, this team is going - and if someone tells me Link Mauve has become an editor, then he can be added to that team
-
MattJ
But like all MUCs, he seems to be in them all anyway somehow
-
pep.
MattJ, sure, let that team go :)
-
MattJ
Done already
-
pep.
k
-
pep.
Link Mauve, ^ you know what you have to do now
-
pep.
(apply to all the teams \o/)
-
MattJ
We have two Github org members who don't appear to be actual XSF members (now) - Matt Miller and Sam Whited
-
MattJ
Both are in the Editors team on Github
-
Kev
The Editors team can only be members, IIRC (don't take my word for it), so I think they've naturally fallen off.
-
MattJ
Agreed
-
MattJ
Hmm, seems there's one more that shouldn't be there according to a count...
- MattJ does a mental diff
-
MattJ
Guus is not listed here: https://xmpp.org/about/xsf/editor-team.html
-
Guus
I'm not an editor
-
MattJ
Yet is on the Editors team on Github
-
MattJ
Ok
-
MattJ
Ok, done
-
MattJ
Now we have two Github members without teams: Alex and Link Mauve
-
MattJ
Would be good to figure out what Alex needs access to
-
pep.
We can have a secretary team I guess if necessary. What does the secretary have to edit? xsf/xmpp.org? (I wish we could have finer grained permissions in repos)
-
MattJ
You can have individual permissions (in fact that's what Alex has for xmpp.org)
-
Alex
I usually only edit content
-
pep.
MattJ, yeah but if/when Alex leaves the position, then we're going to have to go through that again, whereas we could just swap people in a team ("role") otherwise
-
Zash
MattJ: Am I in iteam?
-
MattJ
Yep, I'll create a team
-
Alex
have plans to move memberbot to our Github org when thzere are no concerns. Lance archived it on Github https://github.com/legastero/memberbot
-
MattJ
Zash, in the team yes, in Github I can check
-
Guus
> have plans to move memberbot to our Github org when thzere are no concerns. Seems sensible
-
pep.
Agreed
-
MattJ
Ok, pretty much done
-
MattJ
There is one more team I would like to solve, there is one called "Core" that just seems to map to a handful of arbitrary trusted people
-
MattJ
It seems that should be replaced by org admins and/or iteam
-
Guus
Sounds good, MattJ
-
pep.
admins?
-
Guus
I just got an email notification after being kicked out of a team
-
Kev
Core can probably go, I guess. Most people in there are org admins.
-
Kev
Owners, rather.
-
ralphm
With Alex being an Officer, maybe you can create a team for officers, and put Peter in it, too.
-
pep.
Kev, should they though
-
Guus
so people that are worried about loosing access have a chance to complain
-
Kev
Actually, all people, by the look of it?
-
Kev
pep.: And yes, I'd arbitrarily claim that all the people who're org owners are sensible to be org owners.
-
MattJ
Kev, yep, looks like all Core members are org owners... I'll remove it
-
pep.
Kev, I don't even know who is org owner
-
pep.
Ah I can see it, cool
-
pep.
I disagree
-
pep.
hmm ok intosi and stpeter are also in iteam
-
Kev
With the exception of Ralph, it's a subset of iteam selected by the (then-)iteam lead.
-
jonas’
Guus, didn’t you leave iteam?
-
Guus
I did
-
MattJ
Yeah, I'd say all Board + iteam are candidates
-
pep.
I was wondering
-
Kev
I thought Guus had removed his sudo, but was still on iteam.
-
pep.
MattJ, tbh I'd vote for board not to be owners, iteam is good enough
-
Kev
I'd be happy with it being an iteam subset, selected by the iteam lead. Same as who gets sudo on boxen.
-
Guus
let's not have half-members of teams - that's just complexity that we can do without 🙂
-
Kev
(I don't mean it's the same list of people, I mean it's the same 'iteam lead gets to make sensible iteam decisions')
-
Kev
Matt might reasonably disagree with me on who a sensible subset of iteam are, naturally :)
-
ralphm
I think the team, whatever its name (Core, Owners), is good as it is.
-
MattJ
It's gone :)
-
ralphm
or "the set of people that are owners"
-
MattJ
It was unnecessary and confused thing. The only thing up for debate right now is who should in the owner list of the Github org
-
MattJ
*confused things
-
ralphm
As I said, it seems fine to me like this.
-
MattJ
Same here, especially since I've run out of any more time to spend on this today
-
ralphm
yay
-
ralphm
Thanks for looking into it.
-
Kev
And, regardless, I think Matt gets to make the call.
-
ralphm
yes
-
MattJ
But now we only have Github teams that are actual XSF teams (or roles), and the only members of those teams are people who are officially members of those XSF teams
-
ralphm
and so does Board, by the way, as we discussed a few meetings ago
-
Guus
👍
-
Kev
Board shouldn't be interfering in iteam.
-
ralphm
right
-
nyco
if anyone wants to engage: https://fosstodon.org/web/statuses/103243542343931019
-
nyco
Newsletter sent PR merged for the blog post: https://github.com/xsf/xmpp.org/pull/660
-
nyco
thx for the rights to merge
-
nyco
now should I do anything else to deploy?
-
Zash
Doesn't The Cloud do that automagically?
-
pep.
nyco, CI should take care of it
-
nyco
then: > now should I do anything else to deploy? 1. Wait
-
nyco
thx
-
nyco
aaaand the wait has been... long! https://xmpp.org/2019/12/newsletter-03-december/
-
lskdjf
ARGH! there's a article in the newsletter that advertises to install dino from snap. That's a terrible idea, the snap is 3 years old and isn't maintained 😢
-
jonas’
hm, my agenda announcement is stuck in the council@ queue. can someone please check which of my addresess is listed as being allowed to send to there?
-
jonas’
last council mail I received went to teh address I used to send the agenda
-
Ge0rG
jonas’: standards@ has passed through, so it's probably not too bad.
-
Ge0rG
jonas’: I'm most probably going to miss tomorrow
-
Zash
jonas’, I seem to have received it
-
jonas’
Zash, I sent to both standards@ and council@
-
jonas’
so you probably got it via standards@
-
Zash
Oh, yeah
-
jonas’
Ge0rG, noted, thanks
-
jonas’
Ge0rG, although it’s a pity because there seems to be plenty time for your stack of AOB
-
Ge0rG
jonas’: I'm unprepared and I forgot most.
-
jonas’
I bet we could find them in logs ;)
-
Ge0rG
jonas’: also apparently Council is not there to do guidance on how the standard should evolve, but merely for voting on submissions
-
jonas’
"apparently"?
-
Ge0rG
jonas’: what about calling up https://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2019-August/036332.html for discussion tomorrow, then?
-
Zash
Doesn't mean you can't do stuff
-
Ge0rG
I can't do stuff
-
Zash
Council status doesn't stop you
-
Zash
Neither does lack of council
-
Ge0rG
I'm blocked on my own segregation of duties issue.
-
Dele (Mobile)
I am doing some cleanup of old code in Openfire and wanted to get a feel of who else in the XSF community is still supporting XEP-0136: Message Archiving and older versions of XEP-0313: Message Archive Management. Is there anyone supporting an xmpp server or client that still handles the urn:xmpp:archive, urn:xmpp:mam:1 and urn:xmpp:mam:0 namespace?
-
Zash
Prosody only includes MAM :2 out of the box.
-
Zash
The there existed a community module for XEP-0136 but it was removed long ago.
-
Holger
ejabberd supports them all out of the box. But isn't the real question whether there are still many clients in the wild not doing :2?
-
Ge0rG
Holger: could you measure that on your deployment?
-
Holger
Well, not without touching the code …
-
Zash
How fast does the XMPP world move?
-
Holger
I would think there should be quite some incentive for client devs to go for :2 as dedup is such a PITA without stanza IDs …
-
Holger
But no idea about the implementation status.
-
Dele (Mobile)
Thanks for the quick response. I was going to remove support for xep-136 and keep only mam:2 🙂
-
Holger
Er yes ejabberd doesn't do 0136 anymore either. Just the older MAM versions.
-
Holger
I think Vacuum IM does 0136 …
-
wurstsalat
https://stats.jabberfr.org/d/000000002/jabberfr?orgId=1&fullscreen&panelId=39 lists client features fyi
-
Zash
Do clients advertise MAM tho?
-
wurstsalat
mam:1 and mam:2 are listed there at least
-
Zash
It's been 3 years.
-
Zash
I would imagine there be more support requests than there are if mam:1 was something people needed. There were some long ago tho.
-
lovetox
if you implement mam:2
-
lovetox
you can just announce mam:1 aswell
-
lovetox
its a subset
-
lovetox
the only difference is guaranteed stanza-id on mam:2
-
lovetox
dont implement 0
-
lovetox
because its different protocol wise
-
edhelas
I can run some statistics in the CAPS that I store in Movim
-
edhelas
But on my side I only support :1 and :2 I think